prostitutes in the senate? (part 2)

Re-cap from last post:

The comparison of a United States Senator changing her mind on a procedural vote due to additional funds being made available for the benefit of her constituents to a woman selling sex for money is unbelievably sexist.

As my excellent friend Robb pointed out in reference to my last post, MSNBC news anchor and commentator Keith Olbermann recently called Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Connecticut) a "senatorial prostitute."

(That statement can be found in the clip below at 5:04, but I recommend watching Mr. Olbermann's entire Special Comment.)



So, from a feminist perspective, or from a personal perspective, having just discussed how appalling I find the rhetoric of Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh in regards to Sen. Mary Landrieu, how do I respond to Mr. Olbermann's remarks?

My specific concern and objection (outrage, actually) to Mr. Beck and Mr. Limbaugh calling Sen. Landrieu a prostitute is that I think it carries a deep(er) significance (than the obvious) when used to insult a woman. Insulting a woman by calling her a prostitute implies that she can't be more than about sex. It takes a woman away from a level playing field, and casts her in a role of servitude and submission. While both Webster's (and Wikipedia) says that prostitute may also mean "one who works towards an unworthy cause," it seems clear that using the word as an insult towards a female inherently devalues her and objectifies her - more so than when used as an insult towards a male.

I wish that Mr. Olbermann had chosen a different word to describe Sen. Lieberman, but I am not sure, not being male myself, that it carries the same weight of debasement when used to refer to a male.

Although I may disagree with Mr. Olbermann's word choice, but I do not disagree with his Special Comment in the least: Sen. Lieberman's conduct throughout the health care debate has been reprehensible, and yes, he has been working for an unworthy cause.

Conversation welcomed and encouraged!